Fair enough. But until all of them are dead, isn't it just as likely that they are using the same logic about America? If everybody on every side dies, who wins? And who is "all of them?" How do we distinguish? How do we know?

 

In their eyes if everyone dies they win. They want to die fighting for their cause. They don't care if we kill them all. We should care if they kill us all.

I see the bolded part on BGP every day. This absolutely drives me nuts. Why do we not refer to McCain as "John Sidney McCain III?" I understand the Hussein part might be the same as Saddam, but is it anything more than a scare tactic to include it every time you write the name?

 

How many people, good and bad, in world history have shared names? Should Obama's parents have anticipated in 1961 that a dictator with a common name would take over some little middle eastern country 18 years later? And what about the "holy one" of the Republican Party, one Ronald Reagan? You know, "the one" who never did anything wrong if you listen to the GOP. He sent money his entire presidency to fight a war against Iran. Who did he send that money to? Someone with the name of Hussein.

 

Bottom line, using Obama's middle name is ridiculous. There are many things you can call Obama out on, but using a given name to scare people? C'mon Republicans, you're better than that.

 

 

There just aren't any significant villains named Sidney. :thumb::thumb:

I completely agree with Obama here and this issue is one of the reasons I'll be voting for him in November. We have to sit down and talk to terrorist organizations and pursue diplomatic channels. There is a reason Hizbollah was elected to power, and that's because they represent the views of a substantial number of people.

 

While I still don't know if I'm going to vote for him or not I agree.

We have to sit down and talk to terrorist organizations and pursue diplomatic channels.

 

What do you suppose should be the focus of this conversation? I'm curious.

 

Regarding Islamic extremists, terrorism has been a weapon (or tactic if you will) since the birth of Islam in the 7th century. So what exactly should we bring to this discussion to make it end after 1400 years (give or take a few decades)? Bear in mind I am only referring to Islamic terrorism in this post.

^Why should we only refer to Islamic terrorism? Remember the Crudades?

 

Native Americans sure felt the threat (and repurcussion) of forgein terrorism.

I completely agree with Obama here and this issue is one of the reasons I'll be voting for him in November. We have to sit down and talk to terrorist organizations and pursue diplomatic channels. There is a reason Hizbollah was elected to power, and that's because they represent the views of a substantial number of people.

Diplomatic channels? With terrorists?

Wow. I'll start using Sidney. :thumb:

 

There just aren't any significant villains named Sidney. :thumb::thumb:

 

You both get my point. Calling someone by their "villain" middle name is a little silly. You guys are both intellegent people; just because you share a name doesn't mean you share similar viewpoints.

 

The only, ONLY reason people state his full name is to scare people who aren't smart enough to look deeper into the candidate for themselves.

^Why should we only refer to Islamic terrorism? Remember the Crudades?

 

Native Americans sure felt the threat (and repurcussion) of forgein terrorism.

 

No, I don't remember the Crusades because I was born in 1965 a few years after the "sades" ended. Besides I am interested in current events for the purposes of this thread. My question is regarding what the conversation with terrorist organizations should be comprised of.

No, I don't remember the Crusades because I was born in 1965 a few years after the "sades" ended. Besides I am interested in current events for the purposes of this thread. My question is regarding what the conversation with terrorist organizations should be comprised of.

 

Surely you had a history class or two? If you are interested in current events, why did you bring up the past (birth of Islam in the 7th century, the past 1400 years)? It is easy to only look at the points that support your own opinion and ignore those that don't.

Diplomatic channels? With terrorists?

Recognize this guy?

 

No longer a sponsor of terrorism or pursuing WMDs. Thanks to diplomacy.

The presidential candidate compared Hezbollah to Hamas, stating they both need to be compelled to understand that "they're going down a blind alley with violence that weakens their legitimate claims."

 

***I see nothing wrong with that AT ALL, we have seen how well our current mindset the last 8 years have gone.

 

:thumb::thumb::thumb:

What do you suppose should be the focus of this conversation? I'm curious.

 

Just get to know them for goodness sake. Listen to their side of the story. The Bush Administration has ignored these groups for far too long. They're legitimate whether or not we want to admit it. Turning a blind eye doesn't make them go away. Nor does bombing their countries. It's time to try diplomacy.

I completely agree with Obama here and this issue is one of the reasons I'll be voting for him in November. We have to sit down and talk to terrorist organizations and pursue diplomatic channels. There is a reason Hizbollah was elected to power, and that's because they represent the views of a substantial number of people.

 

Is Hezbollah the majority party in Lebanon? I am actually curious.

Surely you had a history class or two? If you are interested in current events, why did you bring up the past (birth of Islam in the 7th century, the past 1400 years)? It is easy to only look at the points that support your own opinion and ignore those that don't.

 

THE ONLY question I had of UKpat was to ask what he would discuss when he sat down to talk with the terrorists. A discussion with terrorists concerns "the current". How can that be SO hard to understand? Wow.......

The presidential candidate compared Hezbollah to Hamas, stating they both need to be compelled to understand that "they're going down a blind alley with violence that weakens their legitimate claims."

 

***I see nothing wrong with that AT ALL, we have seen how well our current mindset the last 8 years have gone.

 

Or the 8 before that, or the 8 before that, or the eight before that.....